On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:01:35AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> In 568f196756ad ("bpf: check that BPF programs run with preemption disabled")
> a check was added for BPF_PROG_RUN() that for every invocation preemption is
> disabled to not break eBPF assumptions (e.g. per-cpu map). Of course this does
> not count for seccomp because only cBPF -> eBPF is loaded here and it does
> not make use of any functionality that would require this assertion. Fix this
> false positive by adding and using SECCOMP_RUN() variant that does not have
> the cant_sleep(); check.
>
> Fixes: 568f196756ad ("bpf: check that BPF programs run with preemption
> disabled")
> Reported-by: syzbot+8bf19ee2aa580de7a...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org>
Applied, Thanks
